$~J * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:14.11.2025 Judgment pronounced on:17.03.2026 + ARB. P. 1139/2025 MOONWALK INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate versus M/A ONSTRUQ INTERLAYER PRIVATE LIMITED ....Respondent Through: Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Mr.

Aayushmaan Vatsyayana, Mr. Manas Tripathi, Mr. Vijay Kumar Maurya, Mr.

Harsha Vinoy, Advocates + ARB. P. 1335/2025 & I.A. 26923/2025 MOONWALK INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate versus M/A ONSTRUQ INTERLAYER PRIVATE LIMITED ....Respondent Through: Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Mr.

Aayushmaan Vatsyayana, Mr. Manas Tripathi, Mr. Vijay Kumar Maurya, Mr.

Harsha Vinoy, Advocates CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

J U D G M E N T

1. These are petitions filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“1996 Act”), seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes between the parties arising out of a Techno Commercial Offer dated 08.11.2023 and Work Orders dated 12.02.2024 being subject matter of ARB. P. 1139/2025 and Techno Commercial Offer dated 25.09.2023 and Work Orders dated 16.10.2023 being subject matter of ARB. P. 1335/2025.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. The petitioner is a private limited company dealing in the supply, design and erection of prefabricated buildings.

3. The respondent was awarded the contract for the civil, supply and erection of a pre-fabricated building at two separate projects namely: a. Sri City, Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh (“project I”) by M/s NX Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (ARB. P. 1139/2025)

b. Logos Luhari Logistics Estate Block Nos. 0311, 0312 and 0313, VPO Luhari, Pataudi, Kulana Road, Luhari Haryana (“project II”) (ARB. P. 1335/2025)

4. In relation to project I, pursuant to an inquiry by the respondent, the petitioner submitted a proposal bearing reference No. QN2300986, being Techno Commercial Offer dated 08.11.2023, containing the necessary building layout, dimensions and design loads as per the respondent‟s inquiry to award a sub contract for the project. Similarly, in relation to project II, pursuant to an inquiry by the respondent, the petitioner submitted a proposal bearing No. QN2300864, being Techno Commercial Offer dated 25.09.2023, in accordance with building layouts overall dimensions and design loads provided by the respondent.

5. After detailed discussions on the proposals submitted by the petitioner, the parties agreed to the terms and conditions of the respective Techno- Commercial Offers (“TCOs”) dated 08.11.2023 and 25.09.2023 In furtherance thereof, the respondent issued Work Orders for supply and erection namely:

a. Two Work Orders dated 12.02.2024 in respect of project I b. Two Work Orders dated 16.10.2023 in respect of project II

6. The TCO for Project I contained an Arbitration clause under the heading of Governing Law, which reads as under:

“GOVERNING LAW This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with and under the laws of the Government of India. Both parties agree that in case of any difference or dispute arising between the MOONWALK INFRAPROJECTS PVT. LTD. and the BUYER will be resolved by mutual discussions and agreement. However, unresolved issues, if any, will be settled by arbitration as per the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, and the venue of the arbitration will be Delhi, India. Further for any change in the venue of arbitration, BUYER need to ensure that Moonwalk Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. had accepted the same in writing that too explicitly mentioning the same clearly. In case, if it is not available then the venue of arbitration shall remain New Delhi only.”

7. The TCO for Project II also contained an Arbitration Clause under the same heading Governing Law:

“GOVERNING LAW This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with and under the laws of the Government of India. Both parties agree that in case of any difference or dispute arising between the MOONWALK INFRAP